China: We’ll let Chen, er, study abroad

posted at 9:21 am on May 4, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Both China and the US acted overnight to bring an embarrassing string of incidents with dissident Chen Guangcheng to a rapid conclusion. Beijing announced earlier that they would look favorably on a request from Chen to “study abroad,” which would rid them of the international focus on their repressive regime that suddenly erupted this week:

China’s Foreign Ministry said on Friday that the dissident Chen Guangcheng can apply to study outside China in the same manner as more than 300,000 Chinese students already abroad, signaling a possible breakthrough in a diplomatic crisis that has deeply embarrassed the White House and threatens to sour relations with Beijing.

In a two-sentence statement posted on the ministry’s Web site, a spokesman, Liu Weimin, stated that should Mr. Chen wish to study abroad, he “can apply through normal channels to the relevant departments in accordance with the law, just like any other Chinese citizen.”

Speaking later at a press briefing, Mr. Liu said he was certain that “competent Chinese authorities will handle his application in accordance with the law.”

The announcement came hours after Mr. Chen, in a four-point statement conveyed by telephone to a friend, insisted that he did not want to seek political asylum in the United States but that he had been invited to attend New York University and hoped “to go to the United States and rest for several months.”

Not coincidentally, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland announced that Chen had been offered a fellowship at an American university — one apparently to be named later:

“The United States government expects that the Chinese government will expeditiously process his applications for these documents, and make accommodations for his current medical condition,” she said in the statement, adding “the United States government would then give visa requests for him and his immediate family priority attention.”

“This matter has been handled in the spirit of a cooperative U.S.-China partnership,” she said.

She said Mr. Chen has been offered a fellowship from an American university, where he can be accompanied by his wife and two children.

Thus ends, one presumes, the shockingly inept performance from the State Department and the Obama administration in handling the Chen matter. The State Department all but pushed Chen out of the US embassy in Beijing, reneged on a promise to accompany him to a hospital, and then blamed Chen for the miscommunication. They let themselves be pushed around by Beijing, which miscalculated exactly how the rest of the world would react to their heavy-handed treatment of the anti-One Child Policy dissident, but that doesn’t let the White House off the hook for its callous abandonment of a democracy activist. Smart power, indeed.

Thankfully, Chen and his family will soon be safe, and free. Unfortunately, he won’t be either of those in China, where his work is sorely needed.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

which would rid them of the international focus on their repressive regime that suddenly erupted this week:

I have a different take…I think China wants to take away a very negative campaign issue from Obama…I mean afterall, do you really think that China wants anyone else other than Obama at the helm of this country when the crap hits the fan globally over the next 4-5 years???…and in the process they get rid of a thorn in their side. It’s a win-win for China.

I have a different take…I think China wants to take away a very negative campaign issue from Obama…I mean afterall, do you really think that China wants anyone else other than Obama at the helm of this country when the crap hits the fan globally over the next 4-5 years???…and in the process they get rid of a thorn in their side. It’s a win-win for China.

I have a different take…I think China wants to take away a very negative campaign issue from Obama…I mean afterall, do you really think that China wants anyone else other than Obama at the helm of this country when the crap hits the fan globally over the next 4-5 years???…and in the process they get rid of a thorn in their side. It’s a win-win for China.

PatriotRider on May 4, 2012 at 9:33 AM

Agreed.

WisRich on May 4, 2012 at 9:40 AM

I’ll take it even further. What if this was a setup by the Chicoms as a little relection gift. Let Obama be the hero and get reelected. Then they have the spineless US President for another four years.

But they miscalculated. He was even more spineless then they thought and screwed the whole thing up.

Because China is famous for disappearing people who give the elites in power any trouble, after which China harvests the troublemaker’s organs and uses his blood to paint the walls of an elite’s new apartment. And the Chinese media never reports any of this.

Whereas in America, we have freedom of speech. If you give the elites in power any trouble here, the worst that can happen to you is that you’ll develop a case of natural causes, which the media will dutifully report as natural causes before a single fact is known about the case. After which there may be any number of totally unrelated deaths.

If he is allowed to “study abroad” then he is a communist in dissidents clothing.
This blind guy crossed the water all by himself and found the American Embassy?
What is wrong with this picture?
Something is disjointed.
Am I wrong?

If he is allowed to “study abroad” then he is a communist in dissidents clothing.

…

Delsa on May 4, 2012 at 11:18 AM

I doubt he’s a Party member, but his dissident activities weren’t against the CCP directly. He became well-known as an activist on behalf of rural people that were illegally sterilized or forced to have abortions by local officials.

The relationship between China and the United States is interdependent.
We may owe China money but we are a huge part of their economy.
The stick China has over our head is not as large as you may think1

In one of the other posts on Chen the other day, I commented that I expected the Chicoms to cave on this. I’m sure that someone told them that this was making Obama look bad, and if they could just help him out on this, he would have more “flexibility” after the election. Too bad there was no open microphone.

I doubt he’s a Party member, but his dissident activities weren’t against the CCP directly. He became well-known as an activist on behalf of rural people that were illegally sterilized or forced to have abortions by local officials.

DarkCurrent on May 4, 2012 at 11:25 AM

I totally agree and understand. That is why I am VERY skeptical of this entire play.
Obama is so busy lately? Must be running for office?

The relationship between China and the United States is interdependent.
We may owe China money but we are a huge part of their economy.
The stick China has over our head is not as large as you may think1

Delsa on May 4, 2012 at 11:27 AM

It is an interdependent relationship, but China relies less on the US with each passing day as its domestic market and middle class rapidly grows. Meanwhile America’s dependence on China only increases.

Besides financing a large portion of America’s ever-increasing debt, China is also a very significant $120 billion market for the US. In fact, on a per-capita basis the US actually exports more to China than China does to the US. As a fraction of total GDP the US is much less dependent on access to China’s markets than the other way around, but that access is still very important and increasingly so.

“…the shockingly inept performance from the State Department and the Obama administration in handling the Chen matter. The State Department all but pushed Chen out of the US embassy in Beijing, reneged on a promise to accompany him to a hospital, and then blamed Chen for the miscommunication. They let themselves be pushed around by Beijing…”

It wasn’t just inept, it was utterly unprincipled.

Obama and his crew are guided by perceived political expediency, not principle. Obama will do whatever he believes serves his political advantage, and then portray the most self-serving and corrupt maneuvering as founded in deeply moral principles. Unfortunately for Obama, the mask is slipping, and the bungling and backstabbing sometimes can’t be spun to his benefit, even with the willing collaboration of the Flying Monkey Media.

Strangely enough, the media only barely touches on the reason for Chen’s “dissident” status. Buried deep within the Times article is the mention that Chen protested against “abuses of China’s one-child population control policy”.

Abuses.
People, pregnant women were kidnapped from their homes, beaten, drugged, and then had their children aborted. Most of these women were in the later months of pregnancy- as they could no long hide the fact that they were pregnant. It’s not even clear that the children were DEAD before the women were forced to give birth. I know of at least one incident where the mother war given drugs to go into labor, then her child was thrown into a bucket of water to drown. The woman took a photo with her phone and posted it to the Chinese version of Twitter before police knew what she was doing. (WARNING, graphic image at the link)

I have a different take…I think China wants to take away a very negative campaign issue from Obama…I mean afterall, do you really think that China wants anyone else other than Obama at the helm of this country when the crap hits the fan globally over the next 4-5 years???…and in the process they get rid of a thorn in their side. It’s a win-win for China.

PatriotRider on May 4, 2012 at 9:33 AM

I’m not so sure this takes this issue off the table; the bad part of the event has already happened and it is transparent that this is merely a face saving maneuver.

First, Chen and his family need to be gotten out of China. This should not be a political issue until they are safe. Unless China starts dragging its feet, then it should be front-line messaging from the Republicans about how Obummer can’t even work with the Chicoms over an issue of one man and his family but is getting rolled over such a small issue that he and his administration botched in the first place. Once Chen and his family are safe, then the Republicans can point to the botched diplomacy.

So, if China drags its feet, campaign issue, once Chen here safe, campaign issue. I don’t see this as a win for Obummer at all.

Maybe the Republicans can start re-define Obama’s “Smart Power” brand as more like “Special Needs Power”

Excellent, excellent outcome. We can hope, at any rate. Unless Chen’s only choices are North Korea and Burma, China won’t be able to keep the clamps on him. Much as I have been concerned about the Obama administration’s handling of this, I am extremely glad for Chen. The credibility of the United States is a separate issue; I’m just glad, for now, that Chen and his family will be safe.

I’ve seen more than one “China expert” speculating that the regime in Beijing is tottering, and that eruptions like the Chen situation are evidence of that. I hope they are right. Beijing’s decision to let him travel abroad was probably made because of concern about the sentiments of the Chinese people, with whom he is very popular.

Perhaps Chen will be able to go back in this lifetime, and before anyone might imagine today.

It is an interdependent relationship, but China relies less on the US with each passing day as its domestic market and middle class rapidly grows. Meanwhile America’s dependence on China only increases.

Besides financing a large portion of America’s ever-increasing debt, China is also a very significant $120 billion market for the US. In fact, on a per-capita basis the US actually exports more to China than China does to the US. As a fraction of total GDP the US is much less dependent on access to China’s markets than the other way around, but that access is still very important and increasingly so.

Understood. I am referring to the FACT that we are a huge purchaser of Chinese goods, thereby making it less likely they’d )at least for now) retaliate with the stick.
They do need the United States because of the interdependent relationship we have.
Hence, Timmy Gietner was on the trip??

Besides financing a large portion of America’s ever-increasing debt, China is also a very significant $120 billion market for the US. In fact, on a per-capita basis the US actually exports more to China than China does to the US. As a fraction of total GDP the US is much less dependent on access to China’s markets than the other way around, but that access is still very important and increasingly so.

DarkCurrent on May 4, 2012 at 11:52 AM

They need a strong per-capita base in the United States. Not a shrinking one.

Besides financing a large portion of America’s ever-increasing debt, China is also a very significant $120 billion market for the US. In fact, on a per-capita basis the US actually exports more to China than China does to the US. As a fraction of total GDP the US is much less dependent on access to China’s markets than the other way around, but that access is still very important and increasingly so.

DarkCurrent on May 4, 2012 at 11:52 AMBesides financing a large portion of America’s ever-increasing debt, China is also a very significant $120 billion market for the US. In fact, on a per-capita basis the US actually exports more to China than China does to the US. As a fraction of total GDP the US is much less dependent on access to China’s markets than the other way around, but that access is still very important and increasingly so.

DarkCurrent on May 4, 2012 at 11:52 AM

China needs a stronger per-capita base in the United States, not a shrinking one.

This will die down and he will never leave china and we will never hear any more about it.

douglucy on May 4, 2012 at 1:10 PM

That depends on how much of the world’s attention stays focused on his situation.

Natan Sharansky’s release from the Soviet Union, after considerable travail including torture and imprisonment in Siberia, occurred because of ceaseless efforts, in the US and internationally, by his wife and a group of outraged citizens, who ultimately enlisted President Reagan in their cause.

He remained prominently involved in Jewish refusenik activities until his arrest in 1977. In 1978, Sharansky was convicted of treason and spying on behalf of the United States, and was sentenced to thirteen years imprisonment in a Siberian forced labor camp. For the first 16 months of his sentennce he was held in Moscow’s Lefortovo prison, frequently in solitary confinement and in a special “torture cell,” before being transferred to a notorious prison camp in the Siberian gulag.

A campaign for his release was waged tirelessly by his wife, Avital, who emigrated to Israel immediately following their wedding with the hope that her husband would follow shortly. Intense diplomatic efforts and public outcries for his release were unsuccessful until 1986, when Sharansky was released as part of an East-West prisoner exchange. Sharansky became the first political prisoner ever released by Mikhail Gorbachev due to intense political pressure from Ronald Reagan and the United States.

Keeping up the pressure was crucial: Sharansky’s ordeal lasted 9 years, but his support group never let up, and became increasingly larger.

His biography, Fear No Evil, is a case study in dealing with repressive regimes. Although the core of the book is serious, and nearly tragic, he relates some hilariously funny anecdotes illustrating not so much the banality of evil as its fundamental stupidity.